* * * Pre-debate discussion with Jay Olshansky

I copy this short discussion which I have had with Jay Olshansky, Ph.D. on the Immortality Institute discussion board. This is before we will meet tonight on

Message 1 of 3
, May 22, 2005

I copy this short discussion which I have had with Jay Olshansky,
Ph.D. on the Immortality Institute discussion board. This is before
we will meet tonight on a Chat, at 8:00 PM, tonight (Sunday May 22).
You may join the chat by subscribing first at http://www.imminst.org/
===============================

From: Ellis2ca
Posted: May 22, 2005
RE: Hormones

================
Jay Olshansky wrote:

"A number of hormones, including growth hormone, testosterone,
estrogen and progesterone, have been shown in clinical trials to
improve some of the physiological changes associated with human
aging.61,62 Under the careful supervision of physicians, some hormone
supplements can be beneficial to the health of some people.

No hormone, however, has been proved to slow, stop or reverse aging.

Instances of negative side effects associated with some of these
products have already been observed, and recent animal studies suggest
that the use of growth hormone could have a life-shortening
effect.63,64,65

Hormone supplements now being sold under the guise of antiaging
medicine should not be used by anyone unless they are prescribed for
approved medical uses. "
================

Statements such as: "Instances of negative side effects associated
with some of these products have already been observed, and recent
animal studies suggest that the use of growth hormone could have a
life-shortening effect." cause me to dislike Mr. Olshansky's advice in
general. I cannot agree with anybody who is telling the public to
beware of growth hormone and testosterone (and estrogen and
progesterone) because it will SHORTEN their life, or that hormone
supplements "now being sold under the guise of anti aging medicine"
should not be used by anybody unless they are prescribed for approved
medical uses. The medical use that they are being prescribed for by
the anti aging doctors are precisely to reverse or retard the aging
process, and unless Mr. Olshansky has ever used them and had a bad
experience with them, he should not be telling others what to do when
he doesn't know what to do himself.

I can state without any hesitation that "GROWTH HORMONE AND
TESTOSTERONE will slow, stop, or reverse the SIGNS OF AGING."

And, I believe, time will tell that they will be shown to also extend
lifespan as well as healthspan.

If he is following his own advice, unless he has a severe growth
hormone deficiency, Mr. Olshansky does not use growth hormone or
testosterone himself. (If I am mistaken, please correct me.)

Therefore, he cannot know as much about them as the thousands of anti
aging doctors who are using them regularly, or the thousands more
patients of these doctors who are using growth hormone and
testosterone with excellent results.

Since I have used growth hormone every day for nearly 7 years, and
testosterone on and off for about 5 years, and many other hormones
regularly, I know he is mistaken. I for one am not going to stop using
growth hormone or testosterone because Mr. Olshansky or Andrew Weil
believe it is dangerous or ineffective or unnatural, because I trust
my eyes more than I trust what I read.

I certainly do not think the use of growth hormone and testosterone,
in particular, will result in the shortening of MY lifespan, or
healthspan. But if it does, I will still be grateful that I used them
because they have extended my healthspan at least the 7 years that I
have taken growth hormone every day.

I would like to hear from Jay Olshansky which of the following
hormones he has ever used himself, for what period of time, and with
what results: growth hormone, testosterone, erithropoyetin, and
insulin.

It is not enough to study hormones in medical books, or to study what
the books or studies say, because some of the books say what Jay
Olshansky and others, like Andrew Weil, another famous opponent of the
use of growth hormone, say...

In my opinion, based on my personal use for many years of growth
hormone and testosterone, and based on the feedback to me from
thousands of doctors and patients, his comments about growth hormone
and testosterone are negative and mistaken. As such, they do a
disservice to the thousands of people who read them and repeat them
to others.

=======================
Posted: May 22, 2005

Dear Ellis2ca: The comments to which you refer came out of our
position statement on human aging. This is the collective opinion of
numerous scientists who currently work in the field of aging,
including several involved in clinical trials involving GH. The
clinical trials conducted so far have a consistent message -- there
are certainly short-term benefits involving the use of GH, but there
are most definitely a number of risks -- including among them
diabetes.

There is also no scientific evidence anywhere in the literature
suggesting that the use of GH lengthens life, but there is suggestive
evidence that it could shorten life.

Testimonials do not constitute scientific evidence. It is also
important to realize that the use of GH for anti-aging purposes is
illegal in the United States, and physicians caught administering or
distributing GH for this purpose (as well as for athletic enhancement)
are subject to criminal penalties. More more will appear on this
topic in the coming months.

I have never used hormones. However, I am intimately familiar with the
literature on GH since my son was diagnosed with growth hormone
deficiency at the age of 7 and, after months of agonizing over whether
to use it, decided to do so. This is one of the only three legal uses
of the drug. He is now 17, 5'6" (his projected adult height without
it was 4'10"), he's been off of GH for 2 years, and we monitor him
like a hawk.

There are elevated risks of colon cancer among adults who used GH as a
child, but the risk ratios are relatively small. I discuss this topic
at length in my Introduction to Epidemiology class.

We can chat more about this tonight if you wish.

S. Jay Olshansky
=================

Dear Mr. Olshansky... You admit you have never used hormones, (in
plural that means "any hormone") but excuse me, you want to dictate to
others that we should not use GROWTH HORMONE or TESTOSTERONE or other
hormones when we are finding that they help us to be healthier... You
say you are "intimately familiar with the literature" on GH, but the
literature on GH is full of support for the use of growth hormone,
which you seem not to agree with, as well as with articles that oppose
the use of growth hormone.

You even seem to threaten physicians "caught" administering or
distributing GH for this purpose with criminal penalties!!! I
understand there are perhaps 14,000 medical doctors who are in the
American Academy of Anti Aging Medicine who might fall in this
category...If you try to "catch" them, you will, and you will also
fill a lot of jails with very good doctors who were helping their
patients.

I understand that growth hormone is legal in the United States for
adult Growth Hormone deficiency... Do you propose to send doctors to
jail if they prescribe it to adults who (probably like you) are growth
hormone deficient, and they SAY it is anti aging? What else is coming
on this topic in the coming months? Are you seeking to prosecute
doctors for prescribing growth hormone for anti aging purposes?

I will ask you tonight to tell us more about the "side effects" and
"dangers" of growth hormone. I would like to know more about the cases
of taking growth hormone that caused diabetes, or cancer of any kind.

I am interested to understand the statistics, too... "the elevated
risks of colon cancer among adults who used GH as a child, BUT THE
RISK RATIOS ARE RELATIVELY SMALL" If they are "elevated but they are
relatively small" they might be a statistical variation... And there
are probaby other forms of cancer that are "decreased, but they are
relatively small" too.

Since you will bring statistics about growth hormone and colon cancer
to the chat tonight, please also bring statistics of the thousands of
persons who by now have used growth hormone for several years... Tell
us tonight if there has been any ELEVATION OF THE RISKS OF ANY KIND OF
CANCER reported anywhere among this large group of people, ie, has
there been a rise in the INCIDENCE of cancer among the thousands of
persons who by now have been prescribed growth hormone for adult GH
deficiency, or perhaps "illegal" anti-aging purposes?

There is only one way for you to learn the truth about growth hormone,
Mr. Olshansky. I challenge you and invite you to try a physiological
dose of growth hormone yourself for 60 (or 90) days, legally, under
the supervision of a doctor. You are intimately acquainted with the
literature about growth hormone enough to know that you will probably
survive through the experience without any problem, and maybe with
some benefits. After that, I wish you would join us in a chat again
and tell us your experience, both good and bad. If it is bad, at least
after this you will be able to speak from your own experience and not
only from your intimate acquaintance with the literature.

And please be sure to bring your blood tests to the chat tonight. I
suppose they will show that you do not have any growth hormone or
testosterone deficiency. Bring them, it will be interesting to see the
criteria of how a teacher in Epidemiology decided that he does not
need and should not take growth hormone or testosterone... we'll
discuss it then. (I feel confident you base your decision not to take
growth hormone until now on blood tests... after all, since your son
is growth hormone deficient, it may be inherited from you... so you
have surely taken blood tests to discard this possibility.)

I might add... since your son is 17 years of age and was growth
hormone deficient as a child, and since he has been off of growth
hormone for two years, he is still growth hormone deficient right now.

You would do well to give him at least a physiological dose of growth
hormone every day (or several times each week) for the rest of his
life, or else he will show premature signs of aging by age 25 or 30.

And you don't have to monitor him like a hawk... He is probably as
healthy or healthier than other kids who have not taken growth
hormone.

We can also discuss your knowledge of other dangerous hormones which
we should not use for anti aging purposes, such as testosterone, DHEA,
and melatonin... maybe even some others....

Until tonight... Hasta la vista!

Ellis Toussier

T Cooper

This morning I checked my blood glucose level upon rising and it was 120... about thirty minutes after eating breakfast I checked it again and it was 93...

Message 2 of 3
, May 23, 2005

This morning I checked my blood glucose level upon rising and it was
120... about thirty minutes after eating breakfast I checked it again
and it was 93...

Ellis can you tell me something about this morning effect?

[Hello Terry... you aren�t telling us what you had for
breakfast, so I am going to guess that you had a good
low carb high protein breakfast... YES, or NO? What
happened is that your breakfast stimulated your pancreas to
release the insulin that is stored at night, and so it was
released... and not having too much mess to clean up, it
was enough to drop your blood glucose from 120 to 90...

Another possibility is that your 120 is a mistaken reading...
but it might be correct. In any case, it is too high, and if
I was you I would have tested it again to make sure it is a
true reading. I suggest you should take my Poor Man�s
Glucose Tolerance Test and see if you might be a good
candidate to take insulin, as I do. I THINK you are a good
candidate, because you seem to be pre-diabetic, at least.

You can avoid a 120 in the morning by not eating much carbohydrates
the day before, especially not at dinner... if it was me, I
would also inject a tiny dose of insulin before and after a
"high carb" meal, also. For me, a "high carb" meal means I
ate something I know is high carb, like a piece of bread, or
something I know I shouldn�t eat, but sometimes do.

And a "tiny dose" of insulin means 3 iu Rapid insulin before eating,
and 0 or 1 or 2 iu after eating, according to what the glucose meter
tells me, then.

Ellis, Have you read THE PERRICONE PROMISE by Dr. Nicholas Perricone? I just finished it and he discusses neuropeptides and HGH. However, he doesn t recommend

Message 3 of 3
, Jun 1, 2005

Ellis,

Have you read THE PERRICONE PROMISE by Dr. Nicholas Perricone?
I just finished it and he discusses neuropeptides and HGH.
However, he doesn't recommend injecting HGH. He also points out
the fact that sugars/carbs are pro-inflammatory and as such,
aging.

Some of the suggestions in the book might be useful as far as
minimizing carb intakes and in boosting the effects of the HGH
that we are injecting.

Terry

[Hello Terry... No, I haven't read The Perricone Promise, but I
know that Dr. Perricone recommends low carbs, and I agree with
him on this. "The Perricone Promise" of course is just a nice
title, as if he has something new and different to tell us.
Please give us a summary of anything he says that we haven't
said before on Rejuvenation, and if he has some good ideas I'll
buy the book.

It doesn't surprise me at all that a doctor doesn't recommend
injecting HGH. There are many doctors that don't recommend HGH...
There are more doctors that DON'T, than doctors that DO... But
I am happy to learn from the doctors that DO... Nobody who is not
injecting HGH recommends injecting HGH, least of all doctors, if
they are not injecting HGH, because if they would just try it
instead of being scared of it they would surely say differently.

Tough luck for Dr. Perricone. One of the most noticeable effects
of HGH which almost everybody who takes HGH reports is: "nicer
skin" So good 'ol Doctor Perricone should think twice about what
so many people taking HGH are saying results in nicer skin, which
is the topic of his book.

In any case... I am fortunate that I am taking growth hormone, and
I wish he would be taking it too... but if he does or if he doesn't,
that won't affect MY skin. My skin is pretty nice, considering
it looks and feels like the backside of a baby, and I'm nearly 60
years old.

Toodle doo... - Ellis]

T Cooper wrote:

This morning I checked my blood glucose level upon rising and it was
120... about thirty minutes after eating breakfast I checked it again
and it was 93...

Ellis can you tell me something about this morning effect?

[Hello Terry... you aren´t telling us what you had for
breakfast, so I am going to guess that you had a good
low carb high protein breakfast... YES, or NO? What
happened is that your breakfast stimulated your pancreas to
release the insulin that is stored at night, and so it was
released... and not having too much mess to clean up, it
was enough to drop your blood glucose from 120 to 90...

Another possibility is that your 120 is a mistaken reading...
but it might be correct. In any case, it is too high, and if
I was you I would have tested it again to make sure it is a
true reading. I suggest you should take my Poor Man´s
Glucose Tolerance Test and see if you might be a good
candidate to take insulin, as I do. I THINK you are a good
candidate, because you seem to be pre-diabetic, at least.

You can avoid a 120 in the morning by not eating much carbohydrates
the day before, especially not at dinner... if it was me, I
would also inject a tiny dose of insulin before and after a
"high carb" meal, also. For me, a "high carb" meal means I
ate something I know is high carb, like a piece of bread, or
something I know I shouldn´t eat, but sometimes do.

And a "tiny dose" of insulin means 3 iu Rapid insulin before eating,
and 0 or 1 or 2 iu after eating, according to what the glucose meter
tells me, then.